Nope. The only thing that is used is the numbers, but other than that likeness isn't used at all. Jameis Winston, for example, would be listed on FSU's roster as QB #5.

 


 

Texas A&M only made $59,000 in jersey sales in 2012.  For all sports.  Split that among the athletes and each one would get like 20 bucks. There isnt as much money in video games and merchandise as people think.  

 

I concede my argument, excellent points sirs.

---

As you can probably tell I don't play them.  I'm just used to seeing stuff like this:

 



 

Are player stats/ names/ numbers used in any way?  I honestly don't know.

They can use the names and likenesses of former players who they pay.

 

That is Robinson on the cover of the NCAA 14 video game, but when the game was released, he had already gone pro. The game had all sorts of former players in it.

 

Johnny Football, Clowney, or Bridgewater will probably be on the cover of  the NCAA 15 video game which will come out right before next football season.

 

As far as current players, I'm not sure they can even use the same number anymore. They just program the guys at the positions with similar attributes.

---

The NFL just needs to make a minor league program.  If you don't want to go play for a scholarship, take your chances in the developmental league.  Then guys/girls that want to honestly go to school and learn while playing a sport can do so.

---

They can use the names and likenesses of former players who they pay.

 

That is Robinson on the cover of the NCAA 14 video game, but when the game was released, he had already gone pro. The game had all sorts of former players in it.

 

Johnny Football, Clowney, or Bridgewater will probably be on the cover of  the NCAA 15 video game which will come out right before next football season.

 

As far as current players, I'm not sure they can even use the same number anymore. They just program the guys at the positions with similar attributes.

 

Actually, there won't be an NCAA 15 this year.

 

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball...sibly-done

---

Actually, there won't be an NCAA 15 this year.

 

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball...sibly-done

That's right, I forgot about that.

---

I wonder if the student athletes on scholarship have really thought this through. When I was in college, I wasn't gifted enough to be a scholarship athlete and had to pay my own tuition, meals, room, and other expenses like books and medical treatment. I would have loved to have had the full ride at $26k/yr. And if I happened study hard, I could have graduated early (or if I red-shirted or had a medical injury) with the opportunity to add a graduate degree, making those last two years worth $50-60k. Every athlete who applies his or herself has a tremendous opportunity. If they need to pay athletes, one of two things will happen: either recruitment will be market driven by a limited athletic budget or union representation will cause other non-revenue producing athletic programs to be killed - maybe both. In the end, a few athletes will see increased benefit while most will be impacted by unintended consequences.

---

Even if this doesn't end with players being paid directly, I hope players are given the right to their own images.  When the NCAA makes money off video games/ merchandise, a cut of that should go to the players.

 

It would also eliminate the silly rules against selling signed merchandise etc.

 

This I have no issue with.  It's cutting a student a paycheck just for playing in addition to all the amenities they already get that bugs me.

---

The NFL just needs to make a minor league program.  If you don't want to go play for a scholarship, take your chances in the developmental league.  Then guys/girls that want to honestly go to school and learn while playing a sport can do so.

 

I had a student tell me yesterday that he doesn't need to read because he won't need it in his future job.  I asked him what that was.  He answered that it was playing football.

 

I began to explain to him that in order to reach the NFL, he would first have to meet at least minimum admissions requirements for college and attend three years, because you could not be NFL draft eligible without three years of college.

 

He proceeded to put his fingers in his ears, called me a hater, and told me I was trying to keep him down and crush his dreams.

 

I don't even know where to file this, but your post reminded me of it.

---

The NFL just needs to make a minor league program. If you don't want to go play for a scholarship, take your chances in the developmental league. Then guys/girls that want to honestly go to school and learn while playing a sport can do so.

That would ruin big boy CFB. The NCAA wont let that happen

---

Absolutely no reason not to pay college athletes in football/basketball. The rest of America gets rich off their unpaid labor but hey thats America for you.


I saw a poll on some well respected news site the other day, forgot where. that white people favored not paying players 75:25 and minorities favored paying them 55:45 or something very similar. Not surprising results at all, but something interesting to think about.

This is not a race issue. Please stop.


It isnt unpaid labor. One of the main arguments from NW was that they are already being paid. They just want more, which they may or may not get based on the University's books.


If they open NW books for their football program and see a loss, then what? If they see like a 500,000 gain, ok. Divide that by 100 players and you have 5000 per player... wow. Lets be extremely generous and say they netted 5 million. That is 50000 per player which is exactly what they are already paid.


Its not a race issue. Its about thinking it through.

---

I'm curious how "the rest of America" is getting rich off NCAA football?  I can't say that I've seen a dime of it.

 

I'd also say that the people in favor of not paying players see the value of a good education.  

---

I'm actually shocked that there are people who think that this is a good idea.

---

I'm actually shocked that there are people who think that this is a good idea.

Its because there are big wigs, coaches and AD types who get paid alot. Ok, but there are very few of these guys per school and if you divide their wealth you arent left with much.

---

Another huge problem with the implementation of this is, the employer would be the athletics department, not individual sports. So every sport's expenses are pooled together, every sport's revenues are pooled together. All athletes would be employees, not just some. So if a football team makes a profit of $50,000 per player, that money goes to all sports, not just the one. 80 football players would equal $4M, but, assuming every other sport breaks even already, an athletics department of 400 student-athletes would make $10,000 each. Is that on top on a scholarship or in lieu of one?

 

Now you have to factor in minimum wage, how many hours they can work, etc. which may go against NCAA rules. So the NCAA has to adjust its rules on practice times per week/per year, because it is a business.

 

 

What if student-athletes are paid through the Federal Work Study program? This could be possible, I have never seen a campus job for students pay regular money, it is always set up through FWS. Everyone I know who has worked a FWS campus job had to qualify for it first, then were paid minimum wage, regardless of what the job entailed. You also couldn't work more than 25 hours per week. Each school can dictate how much money they will allow a student in the financial aid package, and it's not allowed to go beyond the cost of tuition. Most sports have partial scholarships, so the staff dictates how much athletic money you receive. If a school cost $20k, you could get $15k in athletic scholarship then $5k in FWS. I don't know how it would work for a football player at Division I level, because they receive a full scholarship or no scholarship. So either the NCAA would have to make D1 football like every other sport with partial scholarships, or no scholarships so athletes can be paid through FWS.

---

They just wanna buy bling bling clothes and big goofy beats headphones.

---

I don't think players should be paid by the schools, thats why they are given a scholarship to be able to show case their talent there.

 

 

The problem I have is that the NCAA dictates what these athletes are able to make off the field. Whether it be funds from a authographs, high rolling fans to attend their school and play there, doing commercials, etc....

 

To me that is the unfair part. If the NCAA let players earn money like the US eventually let olympians do, then we wouldn't even be having a discussion about a union.

---

I say just pay them...get it over with...then say goodbye to all those other sports that cost money...say goodbye to all the scholarships for things like soccer, tennis, (for some schools) baseball, ect...pretty much all sports outside of football and for some basketball.

 

so for all the idiots saying this will help the student athletes...it will end up hurting way more...because you are either stupid or naive to think that this will not end up happening...no school is going to start taking losses because it has to pay the players of a few sports and encur all of the costs of less earning sports.

 

Yep. The greed of a few ends up hurting the vast majority in the end. smh...

 

I'm curious how "the rest of America" is getting rich off NCAA football?  I can't say that I've seen a dime of it.

 

I'd also say that the people in favor of not paying players see the value of a good education.  

 

That last line is probably true as well. If the players themselves are taking that part of it for granted, thats on them. Not sure why getting (in some cases) a free ride at a college that otherwise costs regular people upwards of 50,000 to $100K is somehow blown off by these college athletes and they need more.... :confused: 

 

I'm all for letting the players actually be able to keep what they can get for autographs and stuff like that....but to actually "pay" players? No. Totally against that. 

---

I don't think players should be paid by the schools, thats why they are given a scholarship to be able to show case their talent there.



The problem I have is that the NCAA dictates what these athletes are able to make off the field. Whether it be funds from a authographs, high rolling fans to attend their school and play there, doing commercials, etc....


To me that is the unfair part. If the NCAA let players earn money like the US eventually let olympians do, then we wouldn't even be having a discussion about a union.

Ok, but those rules are in place for a reason other than to just keep players from making money.

---

 

 

I'm all for letting the players actually be able to keep what they can get for autographs and stuff like that....but to actually "pay" players? No. Totally against that. 

 

Agree 100% with this whole statement

 

Ok, but those rules are in place for a reason other than to just keep players from making money.

 

Really, like what??? How does a rule like that help the integrity of the games played?

---

The commercial/autograph thing is fine with me too.  I assume the only reason they're not allowed is boosters/agents paying them excessively for this and affecting recruiting?

---